I didn't mind the '50s-ness of KOTCS. It was no different for me than the intro of TOD or the Jazz in LC...For me Indy films are as much period pieces as they are adventure movies.

The jazz in LC is pretty low in the audio mix so as to be barely there; contrast that with "Shake, Rattle, and Roll" in KotCS. That's a difference in degree enough to be a difference in kind.

They are period pieces, but that is not the same as them treating period-as-genre. They are, decidedly, adventure films. Where they take place is as important, or more so, as when. I doubt that the 1930s suggested Egypt, where the Germans shouldn't be able to roam so easily, or Venice, where nary a Blackshirt is seen. I don't think that the 1950s suggested South America either. I think if the year has much of an effect on the place, it'll be because they want to go somewhere remote from certain tropes, not because they want to lean into them.

And in this thread, where is definitely the more salient piece, so can we move on from this?

I am interested in the question of the sorts of places that this fifth film could go that would broaden Indy's world and, to a lesser extent, possibly broaden an audience's too, giving them a story set in a place where we mightn't expect, or mightn't even know what it's like.

He's been to, what, 13 countries in the films, at best? That leaves many, many more places that he hasn't covered.

I grant your point about ensuring some continuity, but Spielberg and Ford and Williams will all be there for that; that is, those who were in charge and setting the tone are still largely in charge, Lucas excepted.

I guess my question becomes this: do you think think Indy 5 will follow a similar path in that it will go to similar places (desert sequence, university sequence, etc.), or that it will go to a similar number of places (bouncing from one to another)?

Of course there are lots of countries Indy hasn't visited yet, I actually meant locales covered as opposed to individual countries that you touched on in your last paragraph. So I think it will follow that pattern of taking in as many combinations as possible of desert, snow, university, asian, jungle.....

It's a lot easier for me to say what I don't want to see (again), and that would be jungles and deserts. I think these two have been exposed abundantly at this point.
They should leave out the college scenes this time as well. Maybe Indy is a retired teacher and that makes him a full-time archeologist, as opposed to the part-timer he's always been.

This area would make a stunning visual change from the usual jungle/desert settings, and it lends itself perfectly to an archaeological quest, with the rich and fascinating Norse mythology*.

Vast parts of it are very remote and sparsely populated, and cultural references to the 60s could be kept to a minimum.
On the other hand, if Spielberg feels a cold war enemy is needed, it would be easy to throw in the Russians, considering both the geographical proximity and the Winter War (still a recent event in the 60s).

A dig in Scandinavia would be the ideal beginning for a globe-trotting adventure which then takes Indy to many different locations, maybe on the trail of a lost Viking artifact.
The Vikings traveled as far south as Spain, Sicily and Turkey, which gives Spielberg and Koepp a lot of latitude.

*Disclaimer: I know the Thor movies are already tapping into this realm, but it does not bother me in the slightest.

What, you don't like the idea of some Indy action in your neck of the woods?

Wait, I know what you mean.
You want Finland to feature in Indy 6 with an octuagenarian Ford, so old Indy can team up with a young local boy.
"One day Dr. Jones, when knowledge is stored in powerful computers, I will make sure your legacy is preserved for eternity."

Yet there was no reason to mention the Winter War, that felt more like someone trying to show his work - and failing miserably. It would be a lousy reason to excuse their presence two decades after the deed.

I'm not actually complaining about the idea of the Russkies strutting around Scandinavia like they own it. After all, we never had any issues about Nazis roaming around Egypt when it was still a British protectorate. Yet one reason it worked was because they didn't even attempt to handwave or excuse it - they just were there and that was it.

So if you need an excuse, "well, Russia's right next door" is all that's required. There's no need to include the history lesson at all.

People displaying ignorance towards a subject that's somewhat dear to your heart? No, I don't see how that's not gonna touch a nerve.

That being said, I don't expect everyone to be an expert on the history of the region. Heck, most people who live in the region probably aren't. But in this day and age, we have limitless information at our fingertips, so if someone is going to talk about it, it'd be nice if they at least went and read a Wikipedia article or something first.

But even if we excuse your lack of knowledge on Finnish history - and let's do so, since that's not even my main issue here - you're still approaching this stuff in an awfully convoluted way. As in, Russians digging up some wartime weapon on the wrong side of the border is a lousy reason for getting Indy involved, pulp or no pulp. Indiana Jones movies are still quality pulp, after all. One thing that sets them apart from the run-of-the-mill stuff is that the characters' motivations and reasons for being in some place as usually clear. They don't just take random pieces, drop them in a pot, and expect the audience to be entertained by the resulting explosions.

So I'd rather have those pesky Russkies dig up some Norse temple in Sweden. It belongs in a museum, and so forth. Keep it simple, stupid.

My forgotten bunker story may be convoluted, granted, but none of my posts denotes a lack of understanding of the main aspects of the Winter War, or justifies the ignorant tag that you are so laboriously trying to slap on me.

Two more wars (one of them lasted ten times longer than the Winter War), and twenty years of Cold War tensions. Anybody who knows all that stuff would never suggest that the Soviets should be digging around in Finland, or Sweden, or wherever, because of something that happened during the Winter War. To me, that spells ignorance to an E.

But allow me to note once more that I never thought that the idea of the Soviets digging around in Finland, Sweden or wherever was something that should never be done. Artistic licenses and all that. I simply objected to your justifications for it. Less given, the better. It's exactly why they got away with stuff like Nazis in Egypt in Raiders. Or those pesky Russkies doing something that would have turned the Cold War pretty hot pretty soon at the beginning of KotCS.

Two more wars (one of them lasted ten times longer than the Winter War), and twenty years of Cold War tensions. Anybody who knows all that stuff would never suggest that the Soviets should be digging around in Finland, or Sweden, or wherever, because of something that happened during the Winter War.

Once again, you are misinterpreting my words in a vain effort to prove your point.
We are not talking about history as it happened here, just fiction.

And in the context of fiction, I don't see why the the Soviets wouldn't try to retrieve a deadly weapon prototype concocted in the 30s, if they thought it could make them stronger in the 60s, specifically for the purposes of the Cold War.
Particularly if they thought they could make that weapon even more deadly by also capturing the macguffin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finn

But allow me to note once more that I never thought that the idea of the Soviets digging around in Finland, Sweden or wherever was something that should never be done. Artistic licenses and all that. I simply objected to your justifications for it. Less given, the better. It's exactly why they got away with stuff like Nazis in Egypt in Raiders. Or those pesky Russkies doing something that would have turned the Cold War pretty hot pretty soon at the beginning of KotCS.

Yes, you made your point, and I already acknowledged that my forgotten bunker story is convoluted.
On this point I concede, but not on your petulant, unjustified accusations of ignorance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finn

And, oh, Finnish mythology =/= Norse Mythology.

I know that, dear boy. I never said otherwise.
You are clutching at straws.

Before we turned this into a long winded discussion, in my OP I just tried to imply a number of possible topics or plot points: Norse Mythology, Viking trails, some kind of Russian affair dating back to the Winter War.

If I'd known you would nitpick every word, I would have listed them with bullet points.

And in the context of fiction, I don't see why the the Soviets wouldn't try to retrieve a deadly weapon prototype concocted in the 30s, if they thought it could make them stronger in the 60s, specifically for the purposes of the Cold War.
Particularly if they thought they could make that weapon even more deadly by also capturing the macguffin.

You'd just have to bend history pretty badly, because there's not an inch of territory that was held by Finland after WWII that belonged to Russia before the war. Plenty the other way around, though. Unless you're suggesting the Russians established some secret weapons lab behind the Finnish lines during the Winter War?

Now that is a plot idea I would deride pretty heavily, pulp or no pulp.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z dweller

And in the context of fiction, I don't see why the the Norse Mythology, Viking trails, some kind of Russian affair dating back to the Winter War.

There still isn't much that connects the third one to the previous two. At least without very liberal rewrites of WWII history. And as far as I'm aware, the IJ realm's history still mostly follows our own.

---

EDIT: Okay, I thought about it a bit. This whole issue of something happening during the Winter War has the historian in me hyperventilating pretty badly, because I think it goes far beyond even the usual artistic licenses. If one needs an excuse to send Indy to Northern Europe, you can find one without tying the WWII into it. But if we absolutely have to make that connection, here's how it could work...

Whatever this thing is the Russians want, it was somewhere in the Nordic countries even before the WWII. So no weapons labs. Instead it's some ancient Norse artifact, site or something like that, and it's been there for centuries, if not longer. And to get one-up on Hitler, Stalin wanted it, badly. Cue the Winter War (and those other wars no one ever remembers). History happens, and the Russians fail.

To add to the mess, Hitler also tries to seize it. After all he conquered Norway and was pretty chummy with Finland. But something happened that made him fail too (this is were the artist has a free reign).

And now it's the 60s. Khrushchev isn't as nuts as Stalin, and he doesn't wish to risk getting more Commie butt kicked by starting another war. So he simply dispatches a token force to the site that has a free reign while the local authorities look the other way.

Hopefully now we have all our ducks lined up. Are you listening, Spielberg?

For what it's worth, my apologies for being a little caustic.

Then again, I never would have come up with that plot outline if I didn't find something funny with your original notion. Or if you hadn't argued me over it. To paraphrase Kierkegaard, "Sometimes better ideas are born out of conflict than harmony."

Thank you Finn, apology accepted and by all means keep me in line when I'm wrong. I always welcome your insights.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finn

Then again, I never would have come up with that plot outline if I didn't find something funny with your original notion. Or if you hadn't argued me over it. To paraphrase Kierkegaard, "Sometimes better ideas are born out of conflict than harmony."

Whoa, the central character of the Kalevala is an Orpheus-esque figure? That has some potential? I'd be all in favor of sidestepping anything Norse - which is overfamiliar - in lieu of some time with the Finns.

I really think Central Africa should be explored in some way. The literary antecedents of Indy held Africa to be the Dark Continent, unknown and ripe for adventure.

I also think finally seeing Indy in British Honduras, or in Marrakesh, if briefly would be nice touches.

Hong Kong might be interesting as well. A lot of great adventure films of the 50s such as Reagan's Hong Kong, and Soldier of Fortune - both of which inspired Indy greatly - took place there. So did China - another of Indy's antecedents in film.

I'd be all in favor of sidestepping anything Norse - which is overfamiliar - in lieu of some time with the Finns.

One drawback of tapping into Finnish mythologies is the lack of tangible MacGuffins. Well, the stories are full of powerful magical items like the lyra (or kantele, as we call it) of Väinämöinen, but sending Indy after something like that would still feel kind of obscure - from the global audience's POV, I mean. It'd take some infodumping to get people up to speed, and - generally speaking - less time spent infodumping, the better.

Well, there is ONE that's majorly obvious, it pretty much shows up every time somebody writes contemporary fiction about the subject, and for that reason it feels beaten to death. But again, maybe it's just me, and it'd actually be fresh to most people not so versed on this stuff.

I really think Central Africa should be explored in some way. The literary antecedents of Indy held Africa to be the Dark Continent, unknown and ripe for adventure.

I also think finally seeing Indy in British Honduras, or in Marrakesh, if briefly would be nice touches.

---
No more Jungle stuff. No more Desert.

Funny. No jungle stuff but you want Central Africa or British Honduras. No desert but you want Marrakesh in Morocco. Maybe Indy 5 should be set in the Arctic without showing any snow?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raiders112390

Hong Kong might be interesting as well. A lot of great adventure films of the 50s such as Reagan's Hong Kong, and Soldier of Fortune - both of which inspired Indy greatly - took place there. So did China - another of Indy's antecedents in film.

None of the film, "China", takes place in Hong Kong nor does “a lot of great adventure films of the 50s”. Apart from the 2 you mention (neither of which deserve to be called “great”) there isn’t “a lot” more from that decade. A small handful of other ‘50s adventure flicks are set in China or elsewhere in The Orient but there’s no abundance of Hong Kong ones. (English language films I'm talkin' 'bout, as you undoubtedly are.)

---
That said, I’d love to see Hong Kong in the 5th film; Indy against the Commies with some British involvement...